The monarch’s children have precedence. The older is removed from the line of succession once he converts to catholicism. His CofE son would be a complication if the monarch doesn’t have children, but I’d think he’d be the heir in that case.
Green Lantern, unless Spider-Man wore a yellow uniform.
If King Slurry’s eldest son, Crown Prince Uptight, bears a CofE son, Prince Chuckles, and then converts to Roman Catholicism, he removes himself and any future offspring from the line of succession. Chuckles, however, occupies a place in the line of succession in his own right, so would not be removed.
What I don’t know is whether you can have a change of heart and come back without losing your place in the queue. Or how they justify the anti-Catholic prejudice in this day and age.
The catholic marriage would render the elder son ‘naturally dead’ and inelegible for succession, but would not make his children ineligible, as long as the children themselves meet all the standards for succession.
Catholicism is considered permanent. Someone who converts from Catholicism to CofE or from Catholicism to something else to C0fE is still considered a Catholic for the purposes of succession. As to how they justify it, the monarch is the head of the CofE and since the CofE was built as a rejection of Catholicism it would not be the done thing to have a Catholic head.
Important to note that the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 has loosened the restrictions slightly, so now the bar on Catholics only applies to people actually being Catholic. Having a Catholic spouse is no longer a disqualifier.
And while most people don’t have a problem with Catholicism any more, the bar is there simply because the Queen is Governor of the Church of England, which is Protestant, and being Catholic would contradict the tenements of the Church (principally, that the monarch is boss, not the Pope).
True, but by marrying in the Catholic church you agree to raise the children Catholic, so I presumed that future children would not be CofE.
Further question: is it just Catholics, or any non-CofE? I can imagine that having a Presbyterian as head of the CofE would not be the end of the world, but that a Quaker or a Hindu might.
Tenets. While the Church of England may, in fact, own some tenements (I have no idea how it gets money aside from passing the plate), it would not be in violation of those for the head of the Church to be Catholic. Nor would it violate any tenants of the Church (be they in the tenements or other properties it owns).
Definitely not true for some time. When I married a Catholic 40 years ago, she was urged to raise the children Catholic, and I was told specifically they no longer ask the non-Catholic spouse to make any agreement. I doubt it’s gotten stricter in the succeeding years.
